ArticleJournal of dental research2025
Public Valuations of Managing Compromised Molars: A Discrete Choice Experiment.
Article in Journal of dental research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Advances in knowledge and practice benefiting the health and management of first permanent molars in children.British dental journal · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There is limited evidence to support optimal patient-centered management for compromised first permanent molars (cFPM) in children. Based on an online discrete choice experiment (DCE), this study elicits UK adult general population preferences and calculates willingness to pay (WTP) for pathways to manage cFPM. The DCE was designed with information from semistructured interviews and literature reviews, as well as focus groups with an expert panel of dentists, citizens, and policy makers. A statistically optimal D-efficient design generated 18 choice tasks, split across 2 blocks. Each respondent answered one block of 9 tasks to reduce survey fatigue. Choice tasks varied across 5 attributes: type of treatment, provider of care, who makes the management decision, number of future visits avoided, and cost. An opt-out was included (no treatment). Conditional logit models (fixed effects) were used for data analysis, and marginal WTP for each attribute level was calculated. An overall 430 respondents completed the DCE. Respondents valued children receiving care as compared with not. Restoring a cFPM was valued equally to spontaneous or orthodontic gap closure. In contrast, having a partial gap, prosthetic replacement with a bridge, or a full unit gap was valued less than restoration or full gap closure. General dentists were preferred to dentists with enhanced skills, but there was no evidence of a preference for general dentists over specialists in pediatric dentistry. Respondents preferred to be wholly or partly involved in the decision-making process as opposed to the dentist making the decision alone. Respondents preferred less costly treatments and the avoidance of future dental work. Dental care service providers must consider service user preferences for health and nonhealth outcomes in any service redesign. Furthermore, the results provide marginal WTP estimates that can be used to value dental care services.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.